About your Search

20121118
20121118
Search Results 0 to 14 of about 15 (some duplicates have been removed)
that wasn't how the obama administration initially described it publicly. representative peter king of new york said petraeus had briefed the house intelligence committee on september 14, and he does not recall petraeus being so positive at the time that it was a terrorist attack. he thought all along that he made it clear there was terrorist involvement, king said. that was not my recollection. so senator feinstien, did petraeus contradict himself or has he contradicted the white house's version of events? >> we have a transcript of that meeting on that day. and petraeus very clearly said that it was a terrorist attack. and outlined who he thought might be involved in it. so any -- >> this is right after the attack? >> that's the day after the attack. i think there's no question about it. what has concerned me about this is really the politicization of a public statement that was put out by the entire intelligence committee, which susan rice on the 16th, who was asked to go before the people and use that statement, did. i have read every one of the five interviews she did that day. she wa
of congress? >> reporter: republicans say the altered talking points show the obama administration wanted for political reasons to minimize the possibility of terrorism early on. democrats say it shows the facts were still coming in. >> looking at the raw intelligence, there were many conflicting reports some that said there were protests some that said there weren't. there were groups claiming responsibility, others denying responsibility. it took time to get it right. >> why was the talking point memo initially released from the cia after it went through the process, why were certain things taken out? why was there such an emphasis on this youtube video as opposed to the other motivations that could have sparked the attack? >> reporter: the cia talking points memo would have been run through the justice department and other u.s. intelligence agencies before it was given to lawmakers. >> harris: thank you hole molly. we'll learn more about the libya probe and general petraeus' resignation from senator saxby chambliss vice chair of the senate intelligence committee and senator lieberman.
, violence, and corruption in many countries in latin america. i think obama administration will probably say it has done some things to move forward on this issue, talking about shared responsibility, but i think despite some changes in the discourse, the essential elements of the policy have been pretty unchanged until now. again, this does open some -- possibilities. the reaction in mexico will be particularly critical to see where this goes. president-elect peña nieto will be here at the end of this month. i'm sure this has got a lot of attention in the mexican press and among mexican commentators and i'm sure this will be raised and discussed with president obama when peña nieto is here. it is had complications to the u.s. policy in latin america. there is an opportunity that perhaps is greater than when we wrote the report in april to make some progress on these issues. there is more space, little more pressure. at the same time, it is probably smart to keep expectations in check and under control. president obama, i think, has been shown to be pretty cautious when it comes to foreign
. "the new deal: hidden story of change in the obama era," and the t.a.r.p. administrator writing an inside account of the experience called "bailout" so right now, that's beginning in a few minutes, but right now, we'll watch mr. patterson live here in miami. [inaudible conversations] >> hey, up there, yeah, yeah, yeah, if you come up there we'll do it. byrn-- bye-bye, thank you. you're going to the wrong one. [inaudible conversations] feels like one of those movies. [inaudible conversations] okay. right here? yeah, if you could, that would be great. okay. hi. here you go. first in the line, excellent. [inaudible conversations] thank you, thank you. hi. hi, how are you? >> okay, good. >>ed -- good. >> thank you so much. >> this is probably worth a little money. hi, how are you? >> nice to meet you. >> nice to meet you. [inaudible conversations] from the miami area? >> no, i drove down here from clearwater. >> wow happen how long is drive is that? >> about five hours. >> really? wow. what's your name? >> don't put my name on it, it's for my boys' for christmas. >> well, they got x
of the surveillance in the wake of 9/11. thanks to the petri at act and continued under the obama administration. the government has more access to info about us than at anytime in history. a small example of what this looks like. check out this graph of u.s. government from google. these are requests that don't require warrants and this doesn't include the security related requests not disclosed. for awhile, i thought the combination of these trends, the u bik wiity of technology was pushing us to a future where citizens would be unable to keep their secrets while the government keeps its secrets. i feared it would end up totally exposed to each other and the state. the state and its doing and what it's doing in our name would be a mystery. then miraculously, but also inevitably, they collided with each other in the petraeus affair. the four-star general's communications with broadwell reveal a lot of mundane personal failings. really, it seems not anything scandalous as far as the public's fear goes. the only possible scandal, as far as i can tell, is the conditions which the fbi came to read
which is populated by obama administration appoint tees, is where the narrative apparently changed. greg. >> the white house came out yesterday and said, you know what, we didn't make any critical changes. we made one minor little change about the word "facility" but everything else we didn't touch. what did that? >> that's right. that word came from deputy national security advisor ben rhodes who was talk being aboard air force one. today a senator of georgia speaking on fox news sunday suggested that every intelligence community leader who has testified thus far has suggested that other changes were made. >> the hearing we had on thursday and friday, we had every leader of the intelligence community there, including folks from the state department, the fbi. everybody there was asked do you know who made these changes? and nobody knew. the only entity that reviewed the talking points that was not there was the white house. >> independent senator joe leiberman said today a watergate style committee is not needed to figure out answers to the benghazi attacks. >> the senator went on to sor
by once again welcoming president barack obama and his administration to thailand. thailand is the first country president obama choose to visit following the election less than two weeks ago. we recognize the significance of the president and we all thank you for being here today. president obama, it is the perfect occasion to launch the celebration of 180 anniversary of thailand next year. i thank president obama and secretary clinton for actively promo promote... this afternoon i have the honor of accompanying the president for an audience with his majesty the king. the close relationship between our two countries at the highest level. lastly, at the bilateral meetings we had... discussion a partnership. thailand is the oldest ally of u.s. in asia and a long lasting one with commitment to democracy, human rights and free markets. i expressed to the president that it is my firm commitment to the people to preserve and protect the democratic system and i have shared the president's support of democracy in thailand. and democracy will lead to economic prospects. we look to the future and
Search Results 0 to 14 of about 15 (some duplicates have been removed)

Terms of Use (10 Mar 2001)